Do you have a book/series or books by a certain author that you just don't like cause of writing style, what happens or characters?

I hate Kate Atkinson books. The first one I read was suggested by my mom "Behind the scenes of a museum" and it was a slow read, I got through several chapters, but I gave up. The characters bugged me, they were all morons cheating on their spouses - what, the husband cheats on his wife multiple times and then the wife has an affair with a neighbor... what, am I supposed to CONGRATULATE her? No! I think she should've left his fucking ass.The plot twist that the main character Ruby actually was a twin and her sister Pearl died was not very well hidden. In the womb, talks about how she feels someone's on her back, as a baby says there are 72 pics of her instead of the 36 the other two daughers have, and "sometimes seeing [me] in two different places in the room".Given that it's not explained until later how it happened, am I supposed to feel sorry? I can't. I don't know Pearl, I don't know what she was like or why the hell I should care.Also, does this author NOT KNOW what FOOTNOTES are? A footnote is a small sentence that explains something at the bottom of the page... they are NOT CHAPTERS OF THEIR OWN! Stupid woman, if you want to write chapters on this minor character's life, you write a freaking prequel or one-shot-collection book.Hate the characters, hate her writing style... hate her books.

Also, just throwing it out there, I don't like the Lord of the Ring books. I got to 3 Chapters and gave up because nothing happened. Too boring for me to read. Give me something instead of the really, really, REALLY long way of describing how they all got ready to leave and, by the end of the next chapter, managed to make it about a kilometer away from their home.

I HATE the Hunger Games. Beyond the sheer hype and craze for these books, I read them and notice all the flaws in it. The first book I actually thought was original and pretty good. However, the series started really declining after that and the second book was practically a repeat of the first. The third had the main character devolve into this whiny fit, which put her character development backwards.

The problem with these books is that they tried to force in this love triangle that I felt was just tacked on. Now, I understand that opens up a female audience and all that but it felt like the author crams this stuff down the reader's throat.

The problem with these books is that they tried to force in this love triangle that I felt was just tacked on. Now, I understand that opens up a female audience and all that but it felt like the author crams this stuff down the reader's throat.

Urgh, I hate love triangles...! Okay, I don't hate them on principal. Although I do not see why Love Triangle = Female Audience Interest, I mean, I'm a woman and there are tons of Love Triangles I hate. I mean, most of the time, when you put in a Love Triangle - whether forced or part of the story to begin with, you can just tell which one is gonna "win" and end up a couple. Either because the interactions are a certain way, the characters' behavior means something or you just know that one of them will never go beyond the "Friendzone".

Such Love Triangle just waste ones time, especially with stupid dramatic whine-fests like they don't know which one to pick, when their behavior is so obviously pointing to that one person...! A Love Triangle doesn't give depth to the story. Knowing that one appears just makes me realize I'm gonna have to deal with people being indecisive... urgh I wanna punch such people...

The problem with these books is that they tried to force in this love triangle that I felt was just tacked on. Now, I understand that opens up a female audience and all that but it felt like the author crams this stuff down the reader's throat.

Urgh, I hate love triangles...! Okay, I don't hate them on principal. Although I do not see why Love Triangle = Female Audience Interest, I mean, I'm a woman and there are tons of Love Triangles I hate. I mean, most of the time, when you put in a Love Triangle - whether forced or part of the story to begin with, you can just tell which one is gonna "win" and end up a couple. Either because the interactions are a certain way, the characters' behavior means something or you just know that one of them will never go beyond the "Friendzone".

Such Love Triangle just waste ones time, especially with stupid dramatic whine-fests like they don't know which one to pick, when their behavior is so obviously pointing to that one person...! A Love Triangle doesn't give depth to the story. Knowing that one appears just makes me realize I'm gonna have to deal with people being indecisive... urgh I wanna punch such people...

C-A

Granted, anyone, male or female can enjoy a triangle. I just assumed guys read it for the slaughter fest and girls read it for the romance. I will give the book credit by saying it used the love triangle in an interesting way. The protagonist realizes if she pretends to be in love with this guy in the games, the media will give her more attention and increase her chances of survival. But then she also loves her best friend, blah blah blah. Problem is is that I don't care who she ends up with because it was pretty uninteresting.

I'm on my phone, so I don't want to write too long of a post, but... Basically the fact that everyone in the book is a really unlikeable jerk, and just the fact that everyone acts really moronically. Also, lolShirtScene.

I HATE the Hunger Games. Beyond the sheer hype and craze for these books, I read them and notice all the flaws in it. The first book I actually thought was original and pretty good. However, the series started really declining after that and the second book was practically a repeat of the first. The third had the main character devolve into this whiny fit, which put her character development backwards.

The problem with these books is that they tried to force in this love triangle that I felt was just tacked on. Now, I understand that opens up a female audience and all that but it felt like the author crams this stuff down the reader's throat.

Yeah I know what you mean. I think the series was good, but I wasn't that struck on Katniss. She just seemed unrealistically "selfless" to a point where it wasn't believable. I can't think of any specific examples as it's been a few years, but I became especially annoyed in Mockingjay. Also, I don't think that "love triangle = female" either, because I'm not a fan of love triangles. It just depends on the person if he/she likes that stuff. I read the series for the crazy things the Capitol did to the contestants in the arena. That was interesting.

I don't like Dan Brown. I was really really into Angels and Demons because I thought the camerlengo's storyline was incredible (and the movie was well done! Ewen McGregor was awesome. ), but Langdon was pretty unrealistic. He forgot things until perfectly opportune moments, when he would suddenly become a walking encyclopedia and know just the thing that would save the day. Dan Brown takes plot convenience to a whole new level... I never see anyone criticizing this about his work, but it keeps me from enjoying it. It's annoying because the premises, writing, and pacing are always well done, but the plot is handled so poorly. I couldn't even finish the Da Vinci Code. He's got potential but he needs to figure some things out about plot.

I'm not too fond of the way Rowling writes and I don't care a lot for the characters. (I still like Hagrid, though. I think. Unless he turns into a giant jerk after book five.)

...Hagrid a jerk? Oh yes. For part of Book 6. And that has a reason. Kids he saw as good friends refusing his course and then his long-time friend of over 50 years is dying... come on, you gotta cut the guy some slack for not being the nicest person with that emotional turmoil. Plus, afterwards, he's the same loveable bit of a doofus he was before.

I'm not too fond of the way Rowling writes and I don't care a lot for the characters. (I still like Hagrid, though. I think. Unless he turns into a giant jerk after book five.)

...Hagrid a jerk? Oh yes. For part of Book 6. And that has a reason. Kids he saw as good friends refusing his course and then his long-time friend of over 50 years is dying... come on, you gotta cut the guy some slack for not being the nicest person with that emotional turmoil. Plus, afterwards, he's the same loveable bit of a doofus he was before.

C-A

Ha! That sounds pretty interesting... I had no idea.

Gimme a "P"! Gimme an "I"! Give me a "P" and an "E"! What's that spell?! Pipe!

While I wrote that I didn't like JK Rowling's books, I don't hate them.

There is a book I really hate. Really. The lovely bones. I read it when I was sixteen or so, my mother just bought it and she said the premise was good but the book was awful. I read it out of curiosity; and it was. Ugh. I can't even pinpoint what I hate about it; uhhh my murderer uhhh my heaven which is a school, uuuhhhh my thirteen or fourteen or whatever-year old sister has windows in her twat... It all felt so obnoxious. And them some karma. Grngh.

Gimme a "P"! Gimme an "I"! Give me a "P" and an "E"! What's that spell?! Pipe!

Hoo boy, there's a lot. I'll just give you the (somewhat) brief version:

- anything by Brandon Mull. I don't like his writing style.

- Harry Potter. I like stories that move fairly quickly and make sure every detail counts, and there are so many extra chapters and characters that don't advance the plot in any way. In the words of a wise man, "This is a colossal waste of time."

- anything by Rick Riordan as of late. He seems to be stuck in his Percy Jackson formula (kid discovers he's a demigod and that his other parent is some famous god from Greek/Roman/Norse/whatever mythology, goes to some special camp for demigods, learns that the gods need help, starts epic quest with fellow demigods to help). It worked once, Rick. Stop rehashing it over and over again.

The Grapes of Wrath. GOD I HATE THAT BOOK. Like, get to the point already, WE KNOW THE MAIN CHARACTERS AREN'T THE ONLY ONES SUFFERING. ALSO, METAPHORS DON'T NEED ENTIRE CHAPTERS. YOU SPRINKLE THEM WITHIN THE PLOT!! Okay, sorry, rant over. I just really hate that book.

Twilight. Like, good story idea, but it would but mad nice if the main character had a personality and could do things for herself.

The Scarlet Letter. Good story, but this book just screams purple prose. Tone it down, a bit, seriously.

Bella Swan HAS a personality. She's a manipulative, bossy, self-centered, I-am-better-than-you, whiny little brat who thinks she's more mature than she is.

As for the story... what story? Twilight doesn't have a story. At least with the first 3 movies, I can understand why people call them guilty pleasures. They bothered to actually put some plotlines in and improved things. (Also, the woman playing Leah Clearwater is fucking hot!)

With Twilight, I think you can only be on one of the two ends - either you like it a lot, or you hate it a lot. Twilight does have a story - only thing is, it completely revolves around the twu luv of the two main characters and forgets every other thing. Any adventurous plot that exists is shoehorned for the sake of existing.

Recently, reading through tons of sporks - both PW and others - I've been able to notice problems in stories more easily. And when I read Divergent, I hated it. My friends were all praising the series, and I'd heard a lot of good about it, but when I read it, I hated the main character. I hated how stupid some stuff were, and though the premise is good, I don't like the story. No offense to anybody who likes it, but I found it impossible to be on Tris' side.

The Riordan thing I somewhat agree with. Magnus Chase is alright so far. Kinda like a lesser Kane Chronicles. I really liked Trials of Apollo though even though I originally didn't want to read it. It's a bit more unique because we already know everything for the most part. Plus it's from a new perspective.

The Riordan thing I somewhat agree with. Magnus Chase is alright so far. Kinda like a lesser Kane Chronicles. I really liked Trials of Apollo though even though I originally didn't want to read it. It's a bit more unique because we already know everything for the most part. Plus it's from a new perspective.

To be perfectly honest, I haven't read all of his books that use the formula. I mentioned it because every time I see a new book by him that uses it, I feel he's just milking it over and over again.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum